A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY: THE LEVEL OF FLOOD PREPAREDNESS OF FIRST-YEAR MECHANICAL

ENGINEERING STUDENTS

Neil Jhon L. Adamson

Rolyn John C. Alvarado

Niña Bianca N. Ambayic

John Emmanuel C. Avila

Sofia Ann B. Belicano

Technological University of the Philippines Visayas

ABSTRACT

The study aims to determine the level of flood preparedness among first-year Mechanical
Engineering students of the Technological University of the Philippines-Visayas. A descriptive-survey
research design was used to conduct the study. A 20-item Likert Scale adapted and merged survey
questionnaire was used to gather necessary data, which was prepared using an online plateform Google
Forms and was sent out from February 4 – 23, 2021 to the six sections of the first-year Mechanical
Engineering students. Out of the total of 194 students, 109 responses were recorded with a response rate
of 56.2%. Descriptive statistics was used to analyzed the Likert scale data at the interval measurement
scale. The results were analyzed as a whole, according to gender and taken by section. Analysis shows
high level of flood preparedness for all. Gender and section do not affect the results. Regardless of
outcomes, it is recommended that the local officials execute flood awareness and preparedness activities
accompanied by the cooperation of the community. And also, the residents to be prepared and apply
emergency preparedness in their own homes.

Keywords: flood preparedness, Mechanical Engineering

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Prima facea, the researchers are grateful to the God for the good health and wellbeing that were
necessary to complete this study.

The researchers would like to express their gratitude to their adviser, Miss Lucille Arcedas, who
guided us throughout. The researchers would also like to thank their friends and family who supported
them and offered deep insight into the study.

The researchers would like also to acknowledge the cooperation of the students who participated
in this study.

To God be all the Glory.

2
 INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Floods are the most frequent type of natural disaster and occur when an overflow of water
submerges land that is usually dry. Floods are often caused by heavy rainfall, rapid snowmelt or a storm
surge from a tropical cyclone or tsunami in coastal areas. Floods can cause widespread devastation,
resulting in loss of life and damages to personal property and critical public health infrastructure. Between
1998-2017, floods affected more than 2 billion people worldwide. People who live in floodplains or non-
resistant buildings, or lack warning systems and awareness of flooding hazard, are most vulnerable to
floods (World Health Organization, 2020).

The Philippines is one of the world’s most disaster-prone countries. With its double exposure to
seismic events and hydro-climatic hazards (located on the Pacific Ring of Fire and the Typhoon belt), the
Philippines is one of the areas on earth which is exposed the most to natural and man-made disasters. As
an archipelago, with rapid urbanization in most of its coastal areas, it is also exposed to the
consequences of climate change and due to its geographical location astride the Pacific Typhoon Belt,
cyclonic storms and floods have been the principal natural hazard in the Philippines—based on frequency
of occurrence and scale of intensity. The densely populated island of Luzon and the Visayan Islands are
most adversely affected by typhoons which are accompanied by wind, rain, tidal waves and floods
(Warren, 2020). In the track of these storms, public buildings, wharves, ships, communication lines,
roads, bridges and local dwellings are either destroyed or damaged, and agriculture is severely disrupted.

  According to the World Risk Report 2018, the Philippines ranked third in terms of disaster risk
index. Due to its geographical context, the highest risks posed to the country are those of earthquakes
reported with ten risk index points and tropical cyclones of 9.5 risk index points coupled with coastal
hazards such as typhoons, flooding, and rising sea levels pose a constant threat to the population with
over 100 million inhabitants as of 2015. The Philippine government has developed strong coping
mechanisms over their long history of experience with disasters specifically, flood occurrences. Yet,
significant gaps remain in flood management capacities across different regions of the Philippines and
surprisingly little data are available referencing local levels of flood resilience and preparedness.

Floods are unpredictable and destructive, and they can happen in regions that have never seen
rain. They can cause death and injuries, isolate communities, damage major infrastructure, cut essential
services, destroy property and livelihoods. Apart from the physical damage to property, experiencing a
flood can be an extremely emotional time. If you are not prepared for the possibility of a flood, recovery
can be slow, stressful and costly. A few hours spent making your home secure, preparing an emergency
kit and flood plan can help you to survive the effect of a flood.

The researchers conducted this study to determine the level of flood preparedness of first-year
mechanical engineering students considering the students’ experiences on flood prevention and
mitigation.

Statement of the Problem

In this study, the researchers aim to investigate the level of flood preparedness among first-year
mechanical engineering students.

Specifically, this research study will answer the following:

1. What is the level of flood preparedness of first-year Mechanical Engineering students?

2. Is gender of the students a factor to the level of flood preparedness?
3. Is there a significant difference on the level of flood preparedness of the students when they are
grouped according to section?

3
Hypotheses

A student’s gender is not a factor to the level of flood preparedness.

There is no significant difference on the level of flood preparedness of the students when grouped
according to section.

Significance of the Study

The following are the projected individuals who will benefit from this research:

Students. This study helps students to give more knowledge on flood preparedness. There will be a
decrease on rate of injuries, and will help the mental as well as the emotional health of the students
because they already have the idea on Do’s and Don’ts during the flood.

Parents. This study helps parents for assurance on their children to be safer and prepared with the flood
occurrences, for their children have enough knowledge on what to do when flood strikes their homes.

School Administration. This study can help school coordinators; it helps them educate the students in
terms of student’s management on what to do when it comes to flood preparedness. Also, the intent of
this study is to contribute to the overall knowledge of school administration in the awareness of the first-
year mechanical engineering students in flood occurrences and on how to reduce destruction. Findings of
this study can provide empirical inputs for reviewing and reformulating, whenever necessary, flood
preparedness related policies or decisions, projects as well as activities towards making the school
resilient and also making the school provide support relief efforts after a flood disaster to its students.

Teachers. This research provides adequate knowledge and highlights important actions to make to
mitigate the destruction of flood since the students will apply everything, they have learned to invert
greater catastrophe in succeeding years.

Future Researchers. The result of the study will serve as a guide and help the future researcher in their
studies.

Scope and Limitations

This research study is limited only to determine the flood preparedness among first-year students
particularly from Technological University of the Philippines Visayas who are officially enrolled in school
year 2020-2021 that was conducted from January 2021 to February 2017, wherein first-year mechanical
engineering students were chosen as respondents.

The researchers utilized a descriptive survey design wherein the researchers adopted and
merged a Survey Questionnaire: Evaluating Online Disaster Preparedness Training for family Caregivers
of Senior Citizens by Grant T. Chartrand, and Community Traditional Knowledge, Perceptions and
Response to Flood Risks in Nyando basin, Western Kenya (Mwango, 2010). A questionnaire is a
research instrument consisting of a series of questions for the purpose of gathering information from
respondents.

4
Definition of Terms

The fundamental use of the terms in this section remains as a valuable reference guide that
should surely aid the readers of this study in understanding both the content and context of this research.

Flood is the covering of normally dry land by water that has escaped or been released from the
normal confines of: any lake, or any river, creek or other natural watercourse, whether or not altered or
modified; or any reservoir, canal, or dam (Australian Government, 2011).

Flood Preparedness refers to measures taken to prepare for the formulation of evacuation plan,
emergency supply kits, and flood watches and warnings, as well as to reduce the negative effects of flood
(United States of Department of Labor).

First-Year Mechanical Engineering Students are the students who are officially enrolled in
Technological University of the Philippines Visayas for the school year 2020-2021. Operationally, they are
the respondents of this research.

5
 LITERATURE REVIEW

Natural disasters pose daunting challenges for humans. The scale and frequency of natural
disasters have exhibited a rising trend in the 21st century due to the impact of climate change [1–5]. They
usually induce great loss of life and property worldwide. From 1998 to 2017, natural disasters induced 1.3
million population deaths and caused 2908 billion dollars of loss. Natural disaster coping capacity reflects
the ability of people, organizations, and systems, using available skills and resources, to manage adverse
conditions, risk, or disasters, where capacity includes infrastructure, institutions, human knowledge and
skills, and collective attributes such as social relationships, leadership, and management. According to
Wang et al., (2020) from their study, “Quantitative Assessment of Natural Disaster Coping Capacity: An
Application for Typhoons”, at present, natural disaster coping capabilities are quantitatively represented
as high, moderate, or low. These classifications, which are described as the results of relative grades,
have failed to reveal the specific grades of disaster coping capacity. Therefore, an assessment method of
natural disaster coping capacity, which is attempted to quantify the natural disaster coping capacity as
disaster grades, was proposed in this study. First, an indicator system consisting of disaster reduction
ability index, disaster resilience ability index, and disaster relief ability index was established. The index
values were defined as disaster grades according to the historical disaster-related data and information
on the equipment and infrastructure for disaster prevention. Moreover, the index values of disaster
reduction ability, disaster resilience, and disaster relief ability revealed the advantages and limitations of
typhoon coping capacity. This suggests that natural disaster coping capacity can be quantitatively
assessed by the proposed method.

Until now, flood-risk perception in the Netherlands has been solely studied as it relates to adults.
This exploratory study focused on 15-year-old students who have taken geography courses for 3 years.
Since geography education focuses on the formation of knowledge and understanding with respect to
flooding in the Netherlands, we were interested in finding out to what extent knowledge and
understanding of flooding leads to a rational judgment of flood risk that influences flood-risk perception
among 15-year-old students. A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 483 15-year-old students
from different flood-prone areas in the Netherlands. A reference group of 134 students from higher-
elevation areas also participated. In addition to risk perception and risk-related factors, the survey also
consisted of a knowledge test about flood hazards and water management with respect to the
Netherlands in general and with regard to the surroundings of the students’ schools. In general, students
showed low personal flood-risk perceptions and much stronger general flood-risk perceptions. Students’
level of knowledge of floods and flood-related aspects was low. Predictors of personal risk perception
included fear, knowledge of flooding in the surroundings of the school and the awareness of
environmental cues. Further study is needed of the formation of knowledge in relation to engendering
flood-risk awareness among students. (Bosschaart, Kuiper, van der Schee, Jet al, 2013).

Increasing disasters and their associated devastating impacts on society have called into
question the capacity of countries to address disaster occurrences. Hence, primary disaster management
institutions have addressed disaster in a piecemeal manner, commonly through the distribution of relief
items after occurrence of disasters. Considering this shortfall and as a contribution to the current
discourse of disaster management, this study investigated households’ awareness and preparedness for
flood disasters in Asamankese, a rapidly developing township, which has also seen an increase in flood
disasters at recent times. In this study, "Household disaster awareness and preparedness: A case study
of flood hazards in Asamankese in the West Akim Municipality of Ghana", a mixed research method
approach was used in both data collection and analysis. A survey was conducted to collect data from 200
households in the township. Two focus group discussions were also organised to gather in-depth insights.
The study found that households’ awareness of flood disaster risks was very high in both flood-prone and
non-flood-prone ecological zones of Asamankese. Also, notable from the study was that whereas level of
awareness was high among residents, preparedness levels were generally low, especially in terms of
financial preparedness. Several recommendations were proposed, which include improving public
education and sensitisation on flood disaster preparedness strategies, creating financial support scheme
for residents to increase their financial preparedness as well as encouraging residents to increase their
social capital support and participate in community gatherings. (Glago, 2019).

6
 Disaster preparedness is one of the important elements in disaster risk reduction and it
encompasses community awareness, readiness to render appropriate responses and quick recovery
(Ejeta et al. 2015). Despite its importance, less has been done globally to improve the levels of disaster
preparedness (Paton 2003). School preparedness is always the best way to face future disasters to make
sure that in the event of a catastrophe, the loss of life is at very least minimal (Smart Schools Program,
2012). Preparedness planning should be based on accurate knowledge of the threat. Part of knowing the
threat means understanding the basic characteristics of these hazards, such as speed of onset, scope
and duration of impact, and potential for producing casualties and property damage (Lindell & Perry,
2008).

Knowledge on the levels of preparedness can inform the disaster management process and lead
to well-informed plans and decisions. On the other hand, lack of disaster preparedness as it has been
reported in some categories of disaster such as floods, earthquakes and fires can result in negative
economic and social consequences (Wilson 2007). Therefore, preparedness becomes an important
aspect for achieving sustainable disaster management. Disaster preparedness in this context is defined
as the measures taken to prepare for and reduce the effects of disasters.

7
 METHODOLOGY

This section of the research includes various methods including the research design, participants
of the study, instrument that relied upon the reliability and validity, data collection and data analysis.

Research Design

The study used a descriptive survey design in identifying the level of flood preparedness toward
the different factors observed, which contribute to the outcome of the study. The design is suitable for the
study, given that identifying the level of flood preparedness of the first year BSME students is in
quantitative method, which is quantified by statistics.

Respondents of the Study

The respondents of the study were the First-Year Mechanical Engineering Students of the
Technological University of the Philippines Visayas (TUPV) enrolled in School Year 2020-2021 and
currently there are 194 students enrolled. The response rate will be identified using the formula:

Response rate = actual number of respondents divided by total number of students multiplied by
100%.

Research Instrument

The study used a descriptive survey design wherein the researchers adopted and merged a
Survey Questionnaire: Evaluating Online Disaster Preparedness Training for family Caregivers of Senior
Citizens by Grant T. Chartrand, and Community Traditional Knowledge, Perceptions and Response to
Flood Risks in Nyando basin, Western Kenya (Mwango, 2010). This study aims to identify the level of
flood preparedness of first year BSME students. The study used two (2) merging questionnaire which was
already validated and tested for reliabilities by respected personnel.

Due to the present situation, the researchers have used Google Forms, a survey administration
software by Google, as the platform of the research instrument. The research instrument consists two
parts. Part I is the Demographic Profile containing information such as: Name (optional) and Year, and
section. Part II is the main answer sheet containing 20 survey questions with corresponding choices that
is based on a five-point Likert Scale with options covering “Strongly Disagree” (1), “Disagree” (2),
“Unsure” (3), “Agree” (4), “Strongly Agree” (5). “Unsure” was used instead of “Neutral” to allow
participants to opt out of a particular question without having to opt out from the entire set of questions.
The questionnaire will require 15-20 minutes of answering.

Data Collection

The study was conducted to the First Year Mechanical Students enrolled in the Technological
University of the Philippines Visayas (TUPV) school year 2020-2021. The researcher conducted the
survey via Google Forms that allowed the respondent to answer at their convenient time the collection of
the data was from February 4 – 23, 2021. The data collected were analyzed and the researchers ensured
that the data collected from each respondent were kept confidential.

Data Analysis

The researchers used descriptive statistics for the data analysis to determine the frequency,
percentage, mean and the standard deviation of the collected data. These would provide quantitative
descriptions determining the students’ level of flood preparedness.

8
 The researcher analyzed the Likert scale data at the interval measurement scale. Likert scale
items are created by calculating a composite score (sum or mean) from four or more type Likert-type
items; therefore, the composite score for Likert scales should be analyzed at the interval measurement
scale. Descriptive statistics recommended for interval scale items include the mean for central tendency
and standard deviations for variability (Boone & Boone, 2012).

Table 2. Likert Scale interval measurements and Interpretation

Mean scale Verbal Interpretation

4.21 – 5.00 Very High
3.41 – 4.20 High
2.61 – 3.40 Average
1.81 – 2.60 Low
1.00 – 1.80 Very Low
Table 2. The 5-point Likert Scale interval measurement was determined through computing the
difference between the highest (5) and lowest values (1) in the scale that leads to a range of 4, then the
range is divided by the highest value (5) in the scale, which gives a value of 0.80. The 0.80 value were
added to the lowest value (1), and the rest follows as it determines the intervals among the scale with
their respected verbal interpretation.

9
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this chapter, the research questions were answered with quantitative data. The questions in
such are:

1. What is the level of flood preparedness of first-year Mechanical Engineering students?

2. Is gender of the students a factor to the level of flood preparedness?
3. Is there a significant difference on the level of flood preparedness of the students when they are
grouped according to section?

This chapter is concerned with the results and discussions. Description, presentation and analysis of
data collected from the respondents are to gauge their level of flood preparedness. Data is presented in
tables, graphs, percentages and words. Data as presented represents the preparedness of first-year
Mechanical Engineering students who answered the questionnaires. A total of 109 students responded.

A total of 109 responses were retrieved from various first year BS Mechanical Engineering
students (see Table 1).

Thus, response rate = (109/194) *100% = 56.2%

Table 1. Distribution of Respondents by their Section

Section No. of students

BSME 1A 20

BSME 1B 26

BSME 1C 21

BSME 1D 20

BSME 1E 22

Table 1. A total of 109 responses were retrieved: BSME 1A = 20 (18.3%), BSME 1B = 26 (23.9%), BSME
1C = 21 (19.3%), BSME 1D = 20 (18.3%), BSME 1E = 22 (20.2%)

10
 Table 1. Mean scores of first-year Mechanical Engineering students

Flood Preparedness

Mean 3.7223

Minimum 2.60

Maximum 4.95

Graph 1. Frequency distribution of mean scores

For

problem 1, the researches wanted to determine the level of flood preparedness of first-year Mechanical
Engineering students. The results were interpreted by identifying the Mean Score and then referred to
the Likert Scale interval measurements and interpretation. The result showed that Mean is 3.72.
Therefore, the level of flood preparedness among first-year Mechanical Engineering students is “High”.

Graph 2. Mean scores in regard with gender

11
 3.9 3.88

3.85

3.8

3.75

3.7 3.68

3.65 3.64

3.6

3.55

3.5
Male Female Prefer not to say

For problem 2, the researchers wanted to determine if gender is a factor to the level of flood
preparedness of first-year Mechanical Engineering students. The results were interpreted by identifying
the Mean Score and then referred to the Likert Scale interval measurements and interpretation. The
result showed that the mean score of Male students is 3.64, Female students had a mean score of 3.88,
and those who prefer not to say their sex had a mean score of 3.68. All mean scores are interpreted as
“High”. The researchers concluded that the null hypothesis, there is gender is not a factor to the level of
flood preparedness of first-year Mechanical Engineering students, is accepted.

Graph 3. Mean scores in regard with section

3.9
For

3.85

3.8

3.75

3.7

3.65

3.6

3.55

3.5
BSME-1A BSME-1B BSME-1C BSME-1D BSME-1E

problem 3, the researchers wanted to determine if there is a significant difference on the level of flood
12
preparedness of the students when they are grouped according to section. The results were interpreted
by identifying the Mean Score and then referred to the Likert Scale interval measurements and
interpretation. The result showed that the mean score of students from BSME-1A is 3.81, students from
BSME-1B had a mean score of 3.64, students from BSME-1C had a mean score of 3.68, students from
BSME-1B had a mean score of 3.84, students from BSME-1B had a mean score of 3.66. All mean scores
are interpreted as “High”. The researchers concluded that the null hypothesis the null hypothesis, there
is no significant difference on the level of flood preparedness of the students when they are grouped
according to section, is accepted.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

13
Conclusion

According to the analysis of data gathered, the researchers has concluded that:

1) First-Year Mechanical Engineering students have a high level of flood preparedness.

2) Gender is not a factor to the level of flood preparedness of first-year Mechanical Engineering
students.
3) There is no significant difference on the level of flood preparedness of the students when they
are grouped according to section.

Recommendations

Based on the findings and conclusion cited by the researchers, recommendations were made for
the different individuals and organizations. Regardless of high results, the researchers recommend that
the local officials should tap and coordinate with the DRRM to conduct flood disaster drills especially to
those areas that are prone and vulnerable in flood every 3 months in their community. Parents should
encourage their children to participate in every drill that the local officials conduct. In their house, they
need to secure personal and important documents such as birth certificates, provide disaster supply and
emergency kit, and they need to plan on what to do in case of disaster. Also, students should actively
participate in all drills and they should take it seriously, so that they will improve their preparedness in
terms of flood. Lastly, for future researchers, they may use this study in conducting related studies.

REFERENCES

14
Bosschaart, A., Kuiper, W., van der Schee, J. et al (2013). The role of knowledge in students’

flood-risk perception. Nat Hazards 69, 1661–1680.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11069-013-0774-z

Ejeta, L.T., Ardalan, A. & Paton, D. (2015). Application of behavioral theories to disaster and emergency
health preparedness: A systematic review. PLoS Currents 7, n.p. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/currents.dis.31a8995ced321301466db400f1357829

Glago, F.J. (2019). "Household disaster awareness and preparedness: A case study of flood hazards in
Asamankese in the West Akim Municipality of Ghana". Jàmbá: Journal of Disaster Risk Studies.
https://doi.org/10.4102/jamba.v11i1.789

Lindell, M., Perry, R. (2008). Emergency planning: improve community preparedness with

these basic steps. http://www.govtech.com/em/disaster/Emergency-Planning-Improve-

Community.html

Paton, D. (2003). Disaster preparedness: A social cognitive perspective. Disaster Prevention and
Management: An International Journal 12, 210–216.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09653560310480686

Smart Schools Program (2012). Environment and disaster preparedness.

http://www.smartschools.ph/tools/environment/disasterpreParedness/12-0207/
The_Importance_of_DisasterPreparedness_in_ Schools.aspx

Wang, T., Yang, L., Wu, S., et al (2020). Quantitative Assessment of Natural Disaster Coping

Capacity: An Application for Typhoons. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343172603_Quantitative_Assessment_of_Natural_Disa
ster_Coping_Capacity_An_Application_for_Typhoons

Wilson, S. (2007). The lack of disaster preparedness by the public and its effect on communities. The
Internet Journal of Rescue and Disaster Medicine 7, 1–8.

World Health Organization (2020). “Flood”.

https://www.who.int/health-topics/floods#tab=tab_1

Warren, J. (2020). Typhoons in the Philippines: a historical overview.

https://mcgillgis.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapJournal/index.html?
appid=586f9150ae87491a8c7f1b86db7952a9

World Risk Report (2018). Risk index for natural disasters Philippines 2020 by type.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/921036/philippines-risk-index-for-natural-disasters/

Australian Government (2011). Flood.

https://www.ga.gov.au/scientific-topics/community-safety/flood

United States of Department of Labor. Flood Preparedness.

https://www.osha.gov/flood

Mwango, N.H., (2010). Community Traditional Knowledge, Perceptions and Response to Flood Risks in

15
 Nyando basin, Western Kenya. https://www.alnap.org/help-library/community-traditional-
knowledge-perceptions-and-response-to-flood-risks-in-nyando-basin

Boone, H. N., Jr., & Boone, D. A. (2012). Analyzing Likert data. Journal of Extension, 50(2).

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/286641352.pdf

16
 APPENDICES

APPENDIX A - QUESTIONNAIRE

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/
1FAIpQLSfwY7iJasHQadCCawzFVzQTGgN99YlzXGZ3dLmXrF8ZPBS82Q/formResponse

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
APPENDIX B – TABLES

MEANS

24
 Statistics

Flood Preparedness
N Valid 110

Missing 0

Mean 3.7223

Minimum 2.60

Maximum 4.95

Case Processing Summary

Cases
Included Excluded Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
Flood Preparedness * Sex 110 100.0% 0 0.0% 110 100.0%

Report

25
Flood Preparedness

Sex Mean N Minimum Maximum

Male 3.6470 67 2.60 4.90

Female 3.8879 33 2.90 4.95

Prefer not to say 3.6800 10 2.80 4.35

Total 3.7223 110 2.60 4.95

Case Processing Summary

Cases
Included Excluded Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
Flood Preparedness * 110 100.0% 0 0.0% 110 100.0%
Section

Flood Preparedness

Section Mean N Minimum Maximum

BSME-1A 3.8125 20 2.60 4.95

BSME-1B 3.6404 26 2.75 4.60

BSME-1C 3.6881 21 2.75 4.90

BSME-1D 3.8450 20 3.05 4.65

BSME-1E 3.6609 23 2.70 4.35

Total 3.7223 110 2.60 4.95

We are giving permission to the teacher to submit our study for possible presentation in local, national, or international

research conference. We are the authors and our teacher is the adviser.

26